“A pleasant illusion is better than a harsh reality.”
— Christian Nevell Bovee
Open-ended comments in 360-degree feedback have both clear benefits and potential disadvantages.
Participants often find open-ended comments extremely valuable because they help clarify quantitative scores, especially when ratings appear inconsistent. For example, rater agreement may be low while the overall score appears moderate or even moderately high. Comments can help explain why.
However, open-ended comments also come with important challenges.
First, they require more effort from raters. Writing useful comments takes time and requires raters to provide behavioral and specific observations rather than vague opinions.
Second, comments may unintentionally reveal the identity of the rater. Even when feedback is meant to be anonymous, participants can sometimes identify who wrote a comment based on writing style, wording, or specific references.
Perhaps the most significant concern is the emotional impact open-ended comments can have on the participant.
Harsh or overly critical comments can trigger strong emotional reactions that interfere with feedback acceptance and reduce engagement or productivity.
For example, Smither and Walker (2004) analyzed upward feedback ratings and open-ended comments for 176 managers over a one-year period. Their findings were revealing: managers who received a small number of unfavorable but behaviorally specific comments improved more than other managers. However, those who received a large number of negative comments relative to positive ones experienced a significant decline in performance.
In other words, the tone and balance of comments matter greatly.
Coach’s Critique: Some Things Are Better Left Unsaid
It is often said that some things are better left unsaid. In the context of 360-degree feedback, I couldn’t agree more.
Raters sometimes take advantage of open-ended comment sections to express overly critical opinions about the participant—either intentionally or unintentionally.
These comments can lead to:
- Hurt feelings
- Reduced confidence
- Lower motivation to improve
This creates a dilemma for coaches and consultants.
What should we do when we review a 360-degree feedback report filled with harsh or overly critical comments?
Do we keep them?
Or do we remove them?
The answer is rarely simple and ultimately becomes a professional judgment call.
In my experience, if a comment is not both behavioral and specific, it should not be included.
If a comment is simply negative opinion without actionable insight, it often does more harm than good.
For example, a rater might write:
“Nobody respects or listens to Joe’s presentations. He is clumsy and boring.”
When reviewing a comment like this, I ask a single question:
Does the quantitative portion of the 360 already identify presentation skills as a development area?
If the answer is yes, I would remove this comment.
Keeping such a remark may emotionally damage the participant, reduce the likelihood of behavioral change, and encourage the participant to try to identify who wrote it. This can lead to resentment and distrust in the feedback process.
Instead, development areas should be communicated through clear, behavioral feedback that supports learning rather than discourages it.
Balancing Honesty and Psychological Safety
The real challenge in multi-rater feedback is collecting honest, useful information while still protecting the participant’s ability to receive and act on the feedback.
When comments are highly critical, it may be better to either:
- Remove the comment entirely, or
- Modify it so the participant can receive it constructively.
Feedback is most powerful when it encourages reflection and growth rather than defensiveness.
A Question for Coaches and Leaders
What has been your experience with harsh or unnecessary open-ended comments in 360-degree feedback?
Would you remove them—or keep them?
Reference
- Smither, J. W., & Walker, A. G. (2004). Are the characteristics of narrative comments related to improvement in multi-rater feedback ratings over time? Personnel Psychology, 57, 575–581.
